#and he can't live with the idea that he had a choice and his cowardice was complicity with the consequences

[thatmexisaurusrex]

I think what really gets me is what the show is telling us through that breakup. That's what hurts the most.

It's that a queer person who's sad, who's alone, who's never had a stable family life; a queer person who's only gotten to a point where they're happy with who they are later in life; a queer person who yearns for a family, for love, for being someone's first choice but doesn't believe he can ever have those things; a queer person who has obviously been burned and believes that is the only outcome for him now; that no one would want him as family. That no one would love him enough to choose him first.

He walks out that door.

Alone. Scared. Spiraling. Reacting to trauma rather than Buck himself. It's seeing that and having the show tell us, yes, that's what he deserves. That's all he gets. He doesn't get a happy ending. He doesn't get good closure. He doesn't get to believe that someone wants him enough to fight for him.

Tommy was right all along.

All his fears were true and will be what he ends up with. Older queer people who want families and are scarred by their own past experiences don't get love or a family. They don't get a place to call home.

Then, you have Buck; Buck blindsided by the trauma; Buck seeing his entire six-month relationship fall apart and just letting it happen to himself again. Having yet another person in his life, in a moment of cowardice and pain, quietly and brokenly lash out that he couldn't believe Buck would actually take this seriously; that he couldn't believe that Buck would love him once the pedestal was gone and the shininess wore off. That, once again, Buck lets his relationship play out without any idea of how to be active in it. That someone Buck loves, that he thought about possibly marriage with one day, that he wants to live with, leaves him.

That Buck, once again, is abandoned.

That Buck can't know himself.

That the show wants to lean into lazy biphobic ideas and tell us, yes, that's what Buck deserves. The thriving relationship that he had crumbles within minutes because Buck doesn't get to be happy; how can he know what happiness is if he isn't playing the field? Because nothing he did before Tommy counted. Buck 1.0 didn't count. None of his previous relationships counted. Because they were all ladies, and how can you know if you've only been with one man?

Telling the audience that you can't be happy in a relationship if it's somehow a "first", despite everything pointing to the relationship being solid and good for Buck.

It is the worst possible scenario.

It is a nightmare for both Buck and Tommy.

Both messages are terrible for the audience.

There were so many ways they could have broken up and I would have been fine with it. I've talked about it before, but I was fine with Josh and Arnold breaking up in Please Like Me and I still love the show. I watched episodes with Josh and Arnold from Please Like Me as a comfort when I was reeling about this that first night! I was fine with Alexis and Ted breaking up on Schitt's Creek and I was still fine with the show. I was okay with Amelia and Kai breaking up and I'm still watching Grey's Anatomy. Because all of those breakups were understandable. They made sense. I can like couples and be okay with them not working out. And they're fictional. Fictional shit rarely hurts me, if ever. That's not my problem at all here.

It's how this happened. It's the message it signals to the audience. It's devastating. I'm still devastated by the choice. I've never felt this way about a breakup for two characters ever. The core of my grief and genuine hurt is what the show proves it believes in through this breakup. And that's what's hurt me.

[neathbound-fiends]

Feeling some type of way about the Citizen's Armada again (as I do every time), but especially now after Horticulture Hell

FL goes out of its way to tell us, time and time again, that the people that are protecting the City are the people that live there. Not the rulers, not the agencies, not the people whose job it's supposed to be. The people doing this are people who said "I can do something" and then did

The Ragtag Flotilla card especially highlights that this is anyone who had a ship to put in the water and was willing to answer the call. No structure. No organization. Just hundreds of random vessels that said "I will do my part" and set out on a mission that could kill them

Idk how to end this, just my thoughts

[animentality]

can I just talk about Godzilla Minus One and how it was absolutely fucking brilliant for a minute?

It centered around a disgraced kamikaze pilot who hesitated, who was scared to die, so sabotaged his own plane before he could fly out. and because he sabotaged his plane, a crew of engineers had to hang back at the base, to try and fix it.

and then of course, this being a Godzilla movie, Godzilla attacks. kills most of them, excluding him and an engineer, who immediately blames him. says that if he had just died, then the rest of them would still be alive too.

his "cowardice" saved his life, and he was haunted by it, ashamed of "betraying" his country simply by wanting to live.

he spent the whole movie struggling with survivors guilt and feeling like he let his country down just by continuing to breathe.

and he couldn't forget the men he saw die, and he can't escape memories of the war, because he's living in the shattered remains of Tokyo after it was bombed, the place he used to call home, where his community is gone and his family is dead, and there is no escaping the death and devastation.

and the people who are still living? they hate him. they blame him for the loss of the war. they blame him for not dying for them.

and because he's haunted by his past, he cannot live in the present.

the guilt of being alive is too tightly wound around his heart. it can't beat even once without him being reminded of all the people whose hearts were nothing but dust now, and the outcome of the war feels like it's solely laid upon his chest.

and that's all very heavy. and I cried.

but that wasn't what I cried at. Because it wasn't the hopelessness that had the most impact on me. it was the end of the movie, where he was given the choice to redeem himself. to die for his country this time, and save them from Godzilla.

and he said he was ready, he can do it this time, he will be the hero. he will lay down his life this time.

only...

...this time, the engineer, who called him a coward... designed his new plane for this mission. and he gave him an ejector seat.

and the movie says this:

"This country has treated life far too cheaply. Poorly armored tanks. Poor supply chains resulting in half of all deaths from starvation and disease. Fighter planes built without ejection seats and finally, kamikaze and suicide attacks. That's why this time I'd take pride in a citizen led effort that sacrifices no lives at all! This next battle is not one waged to the death, but a battle to live for the future."

And it's like...

Oh it's so corny, it's always corny, when the message of a story is simply, life is precious.

But I don't fucking care.

It was still brilliant. It still hits every time. That's what made me cry. Not the hopelessness or the sad things, but the way the movie could be so heavy... while also being hopeful. optimistic.

Everything about that movie was just so perfect. A Godzilla movie actually set immediately after WW2 is a genius idea. The post war devastation. The criticism of Japanese imperialism, the war, and the way it treated its own people, both at home and abroad. The condemnation of kamikaze attacks and the callous disregard for human life.

And the deeply human story, of a man who was afraid to live, after seeing so much death.

Choosing to die wasn't easy. But choosing to live was even harder.

[six-paths-of-jeanmarco]

Thank you for killing me slowly by a thousand mental cuts the ask, anon! First of all, lemme apologize for taking so long to answer, but in my defence, you asked me quite the question here.

I want to say first that I used to be a big snk fan. And then the final chapter was released. It was so bad that it made me look at the whole series with a very critical eye, which made me realize that snk has never been that great to begin with. What really made this story good was the anime produced by WIT, and what really carried the story was its big mystery box. The moment we opened it, everything went downhill bc this was no longer a fantasy world, but a lazy parody of ww2 Germany & Japan.

But more importantly, and referring to the final arc, I started to notice all the rot hidden in plain sight: its fascist and antisemitic undertones, the awful writing, the lackluster worldbuilding, the braindead politics and the inconsistent treatment of characters.

Despite my newfound interest for the cautionary symbolism of Reiner and his character arc, I still think it was handled poorly. I have the same problem with characters like Gabi, Annie, Magath, and Pieck. Their individual arcs ended with them facing no real consequences for their crimes. Magath, despite being a literal representation of the nazi, was rewarded by the plot with a heroic death (a baffling choice when you think about who he is and what he did, and just how brutal and meaningless all of the Scouts deaths were pre timeskip). Reiner, Annie, Pieck, and Gabi were all rewarded with the promise of a new, happier life ahead of them, despite being responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths directly or indirectly.

Gabi herself is proof of just how bad the writing is: RBA lived inside the walls for around 3 years, and yet they still went on with their mission. They still killed Marco. Annie still massacred those Scouts. It took Reiner 7 years to fully acknowledge that what he did was wrong and to finally make amends ... by joining an alliance that had the same goal as that of the warriors for the whole goddamn arc: take down Eren. However, Gabi realized she was wrong in like what, just a few months at best? Their development is dictated by however the plot needs them to be or act. But there's more:

Marco, the Levi Squad, Sasha, and -- as victims of similar circumstances -- Pixis, and Hange, the embodiment of pacifism, were all condemned for being good people, and some of them for believing that there is good in everybody, even in their enemies; and punished for believing that conflicts could be solved in peaceful ways. Does the cautionary symbolism of their brutal deaths still holds up when the story rewards violence and crushes pacifism?

I don't think it does.

Showing that even the worst of the worst are capable of change and doing the right thing in the end is an important message, but. The idea that everyone is just a victim of their uprising or their circumstances is simply wrong. Ideologies don't exist without people, cowardice does not justify orders carried out that lead to attrocities. This idea fails to acknowledge that evil exists. Not just nuanced evil, but pure evil as well. It also goes the other way around. This idea also fails to acknowledge that good can exist.

And also to sympathize with Pieck, who was still loyal to marley despite what they're doing to her own people. And Magath, who in his final moments, revealed that he actually cared about the kids he was indoctrinating and instructing to commit genocide all along. I can't ignore the similarity with the way neonazi like to bring up hitler's friendship with Bernile Nienau, a girl of Jewish origins, as an attempt to humanize him. Heck, even Zeke's final moments painted him as more sympathetic than he was. Such is the case with Floch, and the way Jean reacted to his death. All those characters were redeemed in the audience's eyes without facing any substantial accountability.

I also have a huge issue with the false equivalences that were supposed to show us how morally grey everyone and everything is.

-> The link to the post in the screenshot

Jean and Connie and the Scouts that attacked Liberio aren't just wrongfully presented as something they're not, they're also used as tools to rationalize what Reiner and co have done to them throughout most of the series. Jean briefly does that with what Reiner did to Marco before he punches him to a pulp. Then again with the "we're the same" bs. Then again with implying Reiner is one of them as a Scout. There's also no real tension between the warriors and the Paradis side of the alliance. What the warriors did to Paradis is truly horrific, so their only way for redemption is through their victims.

The mistake that most people do when they interpret their relationship or the characters themselves is to only look at the characters' in-story intent. But there's also this thing called the author's intent that overrides everything. Sometimes, you cannot separate an author from their work. Especially when it comes to the final 12 chapters, where the quality of the writing is in the sewer.

But there's actually another way through which these characters were redeemed: the introduction of a much greater evil and a much horrific event that makes everything else pale in comparison. The main conflict of the story was revealed to have always been Eldians vs Eldians. But that wasn't always the case. Not until isayama retconned Eren, and then treated him the same way he treated the warriors. Eren's friends refused to condemn his actions, and instead repeatedly rationalized, then absolved and thanked him for what he did. It doesn't matter that they still did what was right in the end, that Mikasa killed him, or that Armin admitted they're both going to hell for the atrocities they've individually committed. In the anime. Which came out almost 3 years after the release of chapter 139+the extras and the massive backlash that followed. Let's not forget how that conversation went in the manga:

None of that matters because there's a dissonance between their actions & words and their attitude. isayama couldn't condemn any of his genocidal characters in a way that matters, in a way that would leave no room for moral ambiguity. But perhaps the greatest injustice isayama has committed to his own characters, story and messages was to retcon Eren, the character that was at the center of a message as powerful as the idea that we're all special because we're simply born in this world, into a genocidal maniac that cared about no one and nothing (if he actually cared about his friends, he wouldn't have put them through living hell, not when he actually had the power to prevent it, and if he actually cared about his mother, he wouldn't have killed her) through one of the worst executions of the time travel trope I've ever seen.

Snk is not a story that condemns fascism, let a lone a "masterpiece" when it comes to social or political themes, because it's centralized on justifying the oppression of the Eldians and making it an integral part of the plot. Not only are the Eldians an obvious metaphor for Jews, which is antisemitic on its own given how it's executed, but isayama ends up making them truly horrific because he takes real world antisemitic conspiracies and turns them into factual realities in his own story, all while seemingly acknowledging that Jews have been oppressed and the victims of the worst genocide in history. Moreover, the Eldians also seem to be ideologically inspired by imperial Japan, Paradis in particular. As @ shangyang points out in their essay, we shouldn't forget the fact that this is a manga authored by a Japanese man, nor that Japan has its own history with fascism. (Plesse don't skip any of the posts linked here)

All that being said, isayama's true intent is more than clear: violence is praised because his characters were written so to see violence as their only option, and the fascist mentality of eternal warfare as the status quo. Pacifism is not presented as an option. There's no nuance, only extremism. Even the cycle of hatred at the very end only serves as proof that the intent of the story is to present an extremely narrow worldview in which the human species is only capable of perpetual warmongering, hatred, destruction, and death. Which is wrong and is the very opposite of what I'd call "nuance", imo. And the reason this bothers me so much is because snk and other "morally grey" works alike aren't portraying evil people as just that, people, and evil as something that exists in all of us - no, what they're doing is making the unlikeable likeable, the unjustifiable justifiable, and they're making people sympathetic towards things they shouldn't be sympathizing. Such narratives are banalizing evil (if I had a nickel for how many posts I've seen justifying what Magath did or outright saying they love the guy, well I'd have a lot of nickels) and depreciating good (lots of nickels for all the posts I've seen bashing the Scouts). Such narratives serve as propaganda for the things they claim to condemn.

The result is that such stories beget ignorance, and ignorance is a fertile ground, whether is the case of people who are only interested in shipping and blorbofication, or the people who are not properly educated to know what they're dealing with.

And there's a reason actual fascists and neonazi are circling the series like flies, identifying with the yeagerists, and saying that "Eren was right". They're not taking control of the narrative, they're seeing it for what it really is. The progression of Eren's character arc, his motivations, the retcons, the conclusion of the story, Ymir's motivation, the undeserved redemptions, the characters not behaving in ways they should based on their history, none of those things make sense because they don't have to make sense. They're only pretexts meant to mask the actual intent of the story. The cycle of hatred didn't end because the rumbling truly failed. Because "the enemy" (the people outside Paradis, all of them, as Eren made it very clear) wasn't completely obliterated. Because as long as there's "the enemy", there can't be peace. Fascists have a complex relationship with war. They don’t like it, but "the enemy" is always forcing their hand. The rumbling was meant to succeed.

This is not a cautionary tale for anti-fascists.

Snk is a cautionary tale for fascists.

Now recontextualize all of that in present-day fascist politics, and see where it takes you. But ofc, this is only my interpretation, based exclusively on the story itself.

[hellosweetart]

Hi, so for the Serial Killer Francis Au, I have some ideas (btw I'm not the SK Francis anon, so there could be some inaccuracies in the AU here and there)

About the Milkbread route of the AU, what if: Nacha is a nervous wreck? Of course, she is nice, bubbly, but she also is a ball of crippling anxiety, always scared of messing up everything in her life, from relationship, to work, and to her overall reputation?

As Nacha hung around with Francis, she still noticed something was wrong about him, like how uncaring he was to the world, how sometimes he would drop the most disturbing and morbid statements, but she was just a little bit less decisive. Now at that time, psychology was not a big thing yet, so while her gut was screaming that he's a dangerous man, she still had zero evidence to actually prove that he was and had no reason to distance herself from him. Since Nacha's gut feeling was strong, she even called some of her friends and family members from outside the building to evaluate Francis' behavior. However, all of the people whom Nacha contacted waved off her concerns and some even said that her worries were ridiculous and she might even make a fool of herself if she kept worrying.

So, to not be the jerk, Nacha stayed with Francis. Francis was a smart man, so when he saw Nacha exhibiting her discomfort when he acted "off", he knew to adjust his act. Eventually, Nacha ultimately felt bad for thinking of Francis as one creepy man, (even if her worries is totally valid), and even dated and had Ana with him.

And fast forward till Nacha killed someone and was too scared to do anything that she called Francis and confessed everything. Francis of course was over the moon in a twisted way and helped Nacha with the corpse, pretty much by butchering it so it looks like a doppelgänger mauled the victim.

At this point, Nacha would realize that her gut was right all along because: no way a normal person would look so excited dissecting a whole corpse, and from the way he worked, so "professional" for lack of better terms that it's definitely not his first time.

She had 2 choices: 1, say nothing and live with this cursed knowledge that her husband was a monster in the form of a human while pretend that everything were fine; or 2, confront him about his ways and behaviors, but get blackmailed back because he knew she killed someone. It was not like she had a video recording of Francis casually dissecting a corpse and like I said before, all of Francis' behavior can be chalked up to jokes and stuff, which means that she can't get him arrested, due to lack of proof.

Francis can now force Nacha help him around with his kills, something like a twisted bonding time between the couple. He makes the kills, she helps with the disposing, both of them get bloody together and sometimes she even kill under his threats too. She now can out him for being a murderer, but she would also end up in jail for being his accomplice.

In other words, her cowardice and lack of trust in her own judgement doomed her.

Then come another character: Izaack Gauss. He's the nosy reporter type, whom, like Nacha, notice something off about Francis, but has no proof to accuse him of anything. He's been trying to befriend Nacha for ages to get her to spill something interesting to him about her husband, but she had nothing to say to him... until now. This time, she can rat Francis out to Izaack, and can actually get away scott free since Izaack would be covering for her. But would she actually do it? Or would she be too broken and too drowned in her own regrets to do anything? Or maybe... she may even kill Izaack, in her shattered mental state?

Also, since I also see Francis with Angus and William being friends with dubious morality, I think it'd be somewhat funny if Angus explains his friend group to a random lackey of his like this:

"Ah yes, me, the nerd who created the doppelganger catastrophe, and a dude with superb killing and torturing skills plus his wife who makes good food but looks a bit too traumatized lately, meh, at least she's not ratting any of us out."

This is a great headcanon. Though if SK Francis actively killed someone and need to dispose of the body, he would rather just do it by himself than ask assistance from Nacha. I believe he would prefer to fix his own mess because, in his own standards, he would be a "bad husband" to ask for his wife's help. And if Nacha fell into the same mess (like what she did to the workmate bastard who sexually harassed her), SK Francis would be more than willing to help her.

Speaking of Nacha's trouble, here is my sketch:

Ana peeks out and yeah...something is off with her father.

Also, another thing about my HC for Angus is that on this universe, he doesn't often smile. I think its because of trauma he had endured of owning a shady business and then came along with SK Francis where he has developed a strange close relationship. He can't tell if its amazement, fear, amusement or infatuation...

[tokiro07]

Undead Unluck ch.203 thoughts

[All Words Are Made Up]

[Contents: character development - Nico/Feng]

Oh my god, I was right about something for once! Feng really did use a technique name as his word! Whether or not the attack is stronger because of the context of this particular game, I'm not sure, but given that the whole point is to imagine the desired outcome and he was able to one-shot miniature versions of both of the Gods, I'm going to say it at least didn't hurt

I did say last week that I had no idea how Feng and Nico would interact, but in hindsight I missed something extremely obvious: of course Feng would have an opinion on letting Ichico die! His entire thing in L100 was sacrificing others for his own benefit, regardless of his personal feelings towards them. That one exchange immediately explained Tozuka's reasoning for bringing in Feng rather than the more commonly predicted Tella

The real surprise there, though, is that Nico's response wasn't "I would never do something like that," but rather "maybe the past me would have, but not anymore." I never really saw Nico as the type who would deliberately sacrifice others for his own goals, but I can definitely see him being the type to approach a situation pragmatically. Feng's logic does have a certain amount of sense to it - sacrifice one person, and the other two (plus the world) live; sacrifice no one, and everyone dies. Nico would never be happy to go along with it, but I think a previous Nico would have begrudgingly gone along with it

In fact...he DID! To himself! Back during the Negator War, Nico accidentally became charged with Unluck and had Disc threaten to fall on him and everyone else on Buroja. Rather than let anyone else get caught in it, Nico insisted that everyone else run so that he would be the only sacrifice, as that was the most practical choice. While Nico would never think of letting someone die to better himself, he would definitely make a hard choice for the sake of the greater good

But now, that's not an option. The choice isn't between "the few and the many," it's between "a victory worth having and one that's not." Just like Ichico said, Fuuko's goal is for everyone to be happy, so while even she may agree that defeating Language is a priority, it can't come at the expense of a teammate. Letting herself, Nico or anyone else die to win would make the victory itself pointless, and Nico feels the same way

Feng, of course, never would have felt that way himself previously. Victory was never about the betterment of the whole, it was about the betterment of the self; letting someone die so that the group could live was only his rationale for Nico, but it was never a factor he felt worth considering either way. If it would make him stronger, it's worthwhile, if it wouldn't, it's not, and that's as far as Feng would take it

And that's exactly why Nico needed to remind him of what he's learned up to this point. Fuuko defeated Feng because she was fighting for all of her friends. Shen defeated Feng because he was fighting for Mui. And now, Nico is standing up to Feng, someone he cannot hope to defeat and someone who he actively needs as an ally because he's fighting for Ichico

Even if Feng still doesn't agree that fighting for someone else's sake will make him stronger, he acknowledges that Nico's refusal to let Ichico die doesn't come from the cowardice to do what is necessary to win, but rather the resolve to win in the ideal way. The harder way. Even Feng has to recognize here that Nico is actively trying to be stronger, and that's something he can't help but respect

That said, I think this is the moment where it's finally sinking in that Feng can't get stronger alone. It's been about 15 years since he last saw the Union, and while he's definitely been training since then, he's been completely devoid of a real challenge since then. Without Fuuko or Shen around, there was no one to pose a credible threat to him, and certainly no one he was invested in facing. While he may never come around to the idea of protecting people, Feng must understand by now that he needs other people to push him to greater heights

I think we actually have a pretty solid piece of evidence to suggest that bit of character development as well: Feng's soul reading. The fact that Feng was able to understand the situation at hand simply by making contact with Ichico and Nico's souls not only means that he has an understanding of the soul, but also suggests that he has an understanding of people. I don't see any way that the Feng of the past could have gained the ability to literally read people without having acquired some form of desire to understand and communicate with them. If I had to guess, we should be getting a brief flashback of how Feng spent the last decade within the next few chapters so we can understand how that growth came about

It does seem like a pretty natural extension of Feng's character, though. It's a common trope for martial artists for "communicate with their fists," so a martial artist using psychometry to literally do just that makes perfect sense, but it also ties into his closing line of the chapter. "My techniques will remain in this world forever ingrained in word form." Feng is Unfade, he will never age and fade away from the world, and neither will his works so long as he is able to pass them down. Legacy was a major theme of the Untruth Arc, with all of Feng's old rivals aging out and passing on their techniques to the next generation. While those individuals eventually died, their teachings carried on; their techniques, and by extension they themselves, were remembered

So long as we remember, people never die. So long as we don't forget, people will not fade. The Feng of the past ran the very real risk of being forgotten, as he only ever taught his techniques to others with the intention of making a strong opponent that he could kill as proof of his own strength. By planting trees only to cut them down, Feng's way of life left no evidence of himself behind, and thus left no mark on the world as a whole

But now, Feng has embraced his role as a teacher. Feng isn't raising opponents, he's passing his knowledge down like he was always meant to, and this new ability is perfect for that. As UMA Soul said, the soul transcends physical boundaries to relay information; being able to communicate with others through his techniques ensures that Feng's teachings will continue to be passed on and remembered, ensuring that even if something other than age does claim him one day, he will truly never fade

Until next time, let's enjoy life!

[gaaralover55]

Shuumatsu no Valkyrie/MCU crossover: part 2

Spoilers: In this crossover, a few things are different

First. It's not Odin who is trying to summon the primordial god. It's his crazy younger brothers, Vili and Vé who is trying to do it.

And they both look identical to Odin. The only difference is they are more emotinal and still have two eyes. Unlike their older brother.

The one who was closed to fatally wounding Buddha and Beelzebub was Vili, the middle brother who had disguised himself as Odin

And Thor saw through his facade and was NOT happy.

And if you wonder where the real Odin was when it happened. He was doing it with his wife and the Goddess of Sky Frigg in the hall of the arena. So he missed Apollo winning and the meeting.

Inspired by @greeneyedsigma sexy fanfic!

And the Loki Brunhilde meet at the hall's of the arena was not Loki.

No! It was Logi. The representation of fire, who is also the twin brother of Loki and also madly in love with Brunhilde.

The different between Loki and Logi is their hair colors. While Loki and his sons (Narfi and Vali) has emerald green hair. Logi has flaming red hair that dances like a living flame.

The children of Odin and Frigg are Thor, Saga, Bragi, Baldur/Hodr, Vidarr, Vali and Brunhilde.

Loki is the blood nephew of Odin. Thanks to a blood pact that his mother Farbauti did with Odin.

Mimir is the uncle of Odin, Vili and Vé

The children of Njord are Freya and Frey.

Back to ideas for the story

The SnV norse Gods and goddesses are threats. They are deities that holds back most of their power when they are in the presence of mortals. And this will make the Avengers, SHIELD and MCU Asgardians understimate them.

SnV Odin openly mocks MCU Odin for his cowardice. For hiding Asgards dark history from himself to make himself look good in the pepole's eyes. And because of his foolish choice. Everyone in Asgard has grown Naive and spoiled.

The only ones who noticed this is the Snv gods/goddesses and the Avengers (who kind of understand what SnV Odin means) But the MCU Asgardians (except MCU Frigga and Loki) is Ignorant to it and MCU Thor tries to make the mood better with his horrible jokes.

Especially after they had seen the mural that appeard in "Thor: Ragnarok" where they make the MCU Asgardians look like saints

And No one stops SnV Odin. Because he is actually right. All of them thinks MCU Odin is a hypocritical coward for hiding this!

And SnV Odin has been very opened about the creation of their Asgard. And it's not a pretty story

SnV Thor (who had during this time spent his time with his family and bestie (who is Tyr) starts to worry about his MCU counterpart.

He dosen't like how these mortals (Avengers) are treating his younger blonde counterpart. As if he was an naive child and it made SnV Thor even more worried when he saw MCU Thor didn't get it. He is suppose to be the protector of the nine realms! Not a lumbering fool!

And he didn't like either how MCU Thor acts when he is around mortals. Because it's not sociable acceptable.

Because if he acted like his MCU counterpart did. He would not just humiliate himself. He would humiliate his children, his wife and family.

And his parents (Odin and Frigg) would kick his ass.

He will get even more pissed when he meets Jane.

SnV Sif HATES this mortal. She thinks Jane is an arrogant, knowing all and just annoying woman. And she can't understand what her husband's foolish counterpart saw in her.

The SnV Aesirs and Vanirs can't stand Tony, Jane, Darcy and Dr Selvig. Because they try to magic can be explain through science. Which they can't!

At first. The SnV Aesirs and Vanirs at first started to respect these mortals (The Avengers/SHIELD) and their false gods counterparts ( The MCU Asgardians and Vanirs) because of their will to fight. Even at the risk of their lives.

But that all fell apart when the mortals and false gods started to disrespect them! First at their culture, and then acting arrogantly as if they could take them all down with their technology.

The Avengers and SHIELD are starting to fear the misplaced gods. While they still don't accept they are deities. They starting to make plans to take down the SnV norse gods if they are going to attack earth.

Because they succeded to take down MCU Loki. So how hard would be to take down there counterparts

All of the misplaced gods were offended by this! Even SnV Loki who was laughing like a mad man when he hears this!

He is laughing because these foolish mortals belive they can take down HIM! Loki! The God of mischief! And that they dare to compare him to his weaker and naive counterpart. How foolish.

Meanwhile. SnV Heimdall is in a custody battle against his own counterpart. He wants to take over as parent for Astrid. No I mean "Axl".

And also give the boy a new name!

More will come and would love to hear your ideas!

[nerdygaymormon]

Matthew 5:21-48 "Ye have heard it said..."

Five times in Matthew chapter 5, Jesus uses some version of "Ye have heard that it was said...But I say unto you..." Jesus is saying that this text has been interpreted this way, but I'm giving a better way. Jesus challenged traditional ideas, He expanded the interpretation.

We can do likewise.

There's two words used a lot in Biblical study, hermeneutics and exegesis.

Hermeneutics is deciding what we will use to help us interpret the text. We bring our own sensibilities, experiences, and understandings. Scholars may bring historical context, linguistical analysis, and a knowledge of Hebrew or Greek.

Exegesis is what understanding we pull from the text. The hermeneutics we use will affect what meaning we retrieve. This is why reading the same verses at different times of our lives will give us different insights.

Jesus taught that all the laws hang on the 2 great commandments to love God and to love people. I think we can use that as our hermeneutics as we read the scriptures. What does this teach me about loving God and about loving people? How does this relate to loving my neighbor, specifically the vulnerable and marginalized?

I also think about how does this relate to queer people? I bring to this my understanding that being queer is not a choice, God made us this way and expects us to live our life as queer. It's incorrect to view queer people as broken, not worthy, or not good enough. LGBTQ+ people deserve hope and an uplifting spiritual life.

Given those hermeneutics, let's look at the examples we find in Matthew 5.

—————————————————————  

Matthew 5:21-26

You've heard it said, 'Don't commit murder because you'll be in danger of being judged.' I say if you're angry at your siblings without a good cause, or you call them names, you'll be in danger of being judged and going to Hell. If you've come to worship God but things aren't right between you and your sibling, then leave and make things right before coming back.

Another way to state this is if a person plans to murder someone, but at the last moment doesn’t because of fear of consequences or cowardice, is that person still good with God? No. Don't murder them, but don't even be angry at them. You can't love God if you don't love your neighbor.

How does this apply to queer people? Don't physically harm LGBTQ+ people. Don't murder us, don't beat us up, don't bully us, and don't call us names. Stigma, prejudice, and discrimination create hostile and stressful social environments which lowers self-esteem, decreases psychological well-being, and has other harmful mental health outcomes. Instead, desire blessings for us and hope for our inclusion and equal standing.

—————————

Matthew 5:27-30

You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that every man who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

It is natural and good for a man to be attracted to women, he can't help that, it's how God designed humans so that we will procreate. But if he's attracted to another man's wife, how does he handle that? Does he merely note that she's attractive and move on or does he lust after her and think about being with her?

If two people have made vows to each other, it's harmful to try to get one of them to break that promise. Loving our neighbor means wanting their happiness and wanting them to have fulfillment in their most important relationship. To selfishly desire something for you that would harm their relationship is not loving. We should wish them the best in their relationship.

Unfortunately, I've had people use this passage to argue that being gay is a sin because I'm lusting after the wrong sort of person, just like the adulterer. And furthermore, by simply using the word 'gay' to acknowledge that I’m attracted to men, they say I'm identifying myself by my sin and I’m committing sin in my heart. That's not a generous or loving interpretation. This is not how straight people apply this teaching to themselves.

This scripture provides no reason to think of homosexual attraction any differently from heterosexual attraction. It's not a sin to be attracted to someone, and there are certainly appropriate ways to express those feelings. But if we seek to have sex with someone and upset their married relationship, that is a sin, as is lusting for that in our heart. A Christian should love their gay neighbor enough to want them to find a rewarding romantic relationship, just as they hope for themselves.

—————————

Matthew 31-32

It was said, 'Whoever divorces his wife must give her a divorce certificate.' But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual unfaithfulness, forces her to commit adultery. And whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

The law was if you're going to leave your wife, you gotta give her a divorce certificate. This way she can prove she's not married any longer and can pursue finding another husband.

At that time, men had the power to divorce, women did not. Also, women at that time had little power or rights, they were reliant on men. To divorce a wife is to make her vulnerable to real harm, such as poverty, hunger, and homelessness. To not provide documentation that she is no longer married to you and thus prevent other men from being willing to marry her will cause her harm and is not loving.

Many like to say that sexual immorality is the exception clause, you are not justified in getting divorced unless your spouse has cheated on you, in which case you can move forward with splitting up. I don't know. Maybe Jesus is saying that if she cheated on you then she chose to commit adultery, but if you divorce her then you are causing her to commit adultery should she ever remarry, and you'll also be committing adultery if you remarry.

Christianity has long wrestled with these verses. Forcing people to remain in an abusive relationship or letting them split but not get divorced which means they can't remarry, that doesn't seem like it's in their best interest.

I think due to the LDS experience with polygamy and how difficult it was, the church made peace with the idea of divorce and remarriage. Not that we don't discourage divorce, it's seen as a serious thing, but if someone wants to get divorced, we won't stand in the way. And when someone who is divorced wants to get married, we allow that and even give them the highest blessings by letting them get sealed in our temples. We recognize it is to their benefit to get married and enjoy a loving relationship. They have companionship. They have a partner to help with raising the children and the many tasks of life. They can find sexual satisfaction within the bonds of a marriage. They can help each other progress.

I'm glad my church has put aside this and other teachings against divorce and remarriage, and that we recognize what a blessing it is to individuals to get out of relationships which are harming them and also that it is a blessing for them to join a new, loving relationship.

How can we apply this to queer folks? We allow them the same blessings you want for yourself. Let them form loving, committed relationships and bless those with the recognition of marriage because we know such relationships bless their lives.

—————————

Matthew 5:33-37

Again you have heard 'Don't make a false promise, you should follow through on what you have pledged to the Lord.' But I say you shouldn't make such pledges, and don't swear by heaven. Let your yes mean yes, and your no mean no.

We need to keep the commitments we make. Don't be deceitful. Don't make a promise we intend to break. When we make promises that others rely on, all while knowing we don't intend to keep that commitment, it harms them. They take actions that benefit us without getting the same in return. That's definitely not loving our neighbor. We should be honorable and trustworthy and known to keep our word. We should have integrity.

I think of people who say they love and support queer people, call themselves an ally and say we should be treated fairly by society, and then they vote for candidates who seek to block us from having legal protections and rights. If you're going to vote for our harm, then you're not the loving ally you portray yourself as.

—————————

Matthew 5:38-42

You have heard it said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you when someone hits you on your cheek, turn the other to him. If someone legally takes your tunic, give them your cloak as well. If you are pressed into service for one mile, go two miles.

This is different from the other examples because those were saying for us not to harm others. These verses are how to respond when we get treated unfairly. Jesus is not saying that we should be a doormat inviting more injury to ourselves.

Jesus' examples are forms of passive resistance. If a Roman legionary tells you to do something, and you refuse, you are punished. If you are unjustly sued, and you lash out, then you go to prison, instead here's steps you can take to highlight the wrongness of what is being done.

I've read that in Jesus' time someone could backhand a person of lower status as a way to assert authority and dominance. If someone backhands you, turn your face so they can slap your other cheek. They can't use their left hand as it's used for unclean purposes, so will they now hit you with their open hand as that shows you're equal? By turning the other check, I am forcing them to recognize my equality or to walk away from my challenge to their dominance.

A person's tunic could be used as collateral for a loan, but not the cloak. The debtor can be forced to give the tunic off of his back, but by also giving them the cloak, they're now naked. Public nudity was viewed as bringing shame on not just the one who is naked, but also the viewer. The one enforcing his rights to take your clothes is shamed.

Inhabitants of occupied territories could be forced by Roman authorities to carry messages and equipment for one mile post, but the law prohibited forcing them to go further than a single mile. A Jew at any time could feel the tap on his shoulder from a Roman soldier and know he has to carry the soldier's gear for a mile. By going the extra mile, it's a nonviolent way to criticize the unjust Roman law and cause the Roman soldier to be at risk of discipline

These are each ways to assert our dignity and to shame others for the how they're treating us. Each is a form of resistance but not retaliation, each is a way of highlighting the injustice without it turning into revenge. This is nonviolent resistance, which can be powerful in changing hearts.

This passage reminds me of the first time I went to a Pride event, it was really joyous and wonderful, except for some preacher yelling about how we're all sinners and going to hell and even yelling insults at people walking by including about what they were wearing. He was really getting people upset. Instead of yelling insults back, or worse, a group formed a circle around him and started singing Katy Perry's song "Firework" and the rest of the crowd joined in, drowning out his hateful words, until security could remove him. We did no harm to him and our actions stood in contrast to his hate and anger. It was a way to affirm ourselves and negate his message

—————————

Matthew 5:43-48

You've heard it said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you. God's sun rises on both the good and the bad, the rain falls on the just and unjust, in other words, he blesses all. There's no benefit in only loving those who love you.

When one group perceives another as 'the Enemy,' it's easy for conspiracy theories, prejudice, and fear to cause us to no longer see their humanity. This leads to seeing all Muslims as undercover terrorists or for some to believe that gay people are responsible for hurricanes.

We are to love everyone. This includes people who aren’t our race, or religion, or nationality. This includes sexual minorities, poor people, that annoying coworker, the politicians voting to limit your rights.

We don't have to agree with them. We focus on the issues and don’t make things personal. We can look for peaceful, constructive ways forward. We can have kindness and goodwill for people even as we disagree.

I think of the hatred toward LGBTQIA+ people by many who identify as Christian. The lack of compassion towards queer people is disheartening, and to be asked to love them in return feels difficult, but it can lead to positive change.

In 2004, 60% of Americans disapproved of gay marriage. In 2019, 61% approved of gay marriage. That's a complete flip-flop in 15 years. There were many who were vehemently against gay marriage and expressed hatred towards queer people. Gay rights advocates were speaking of love, and when gay marriage was legalized, we saw videos of couples joyously celebrating their love, which stood in contrast to the bigotry that had been expressed. It's hard to see the joy and love and believe the hateful rhetoric. Individuals naturally don't want to see themselves aligned with people who are harming and hurting people.

We can keep protesting, keep speaking our truth, keep advocating for those who can't, but don't villainize those who oppose us. Stick to the issues and act with compassion and love. Let our actions stand in contrast against those who view us as enemies.

[luxmaeastra]

Rhain turned from the war preparations. He was thankful his mother was dead, that his sister had been ReMade.

He had no ties left to this land, Natalia's idea had legs.

Why work against each other?

Why not work together to secure everyone's future?

They were all tired of centuries of war. But this was the last leg, this was all that was left.

He exhaled, looking to Oraya as she got ready. She turned to him, gripping his wrist and digging her nails in.

"You ready?"

He wouldn't stand by, he wouldn't be a coward. This was war and these trade routes would bring prosperity to everyone. Most of their kingdoms had gone bankrupt in this never ending war.

There wasn't any good choices left.

He exhaled, pulling her closer.

"Do you think less of me that this hurts me Oraya? I barely remember the land and it's like killing a piece of my soul to do this."

Vaalbara was beautiful, it thrummed with life. It thrummed with magic, those siphon stones could be the key to so many different things.

They needed them.

She pressed closer, her grey eyes hard.

"If I wanted someone perfect I'd have chosen one of those nobles Rhain. I like your flaws, it reassures me that you have a soul to feel anything at all. Let me kill, you direct me. Let me take that stain for you."

------

Magnus reached for his riding leathers, his dragon riders had already suited up. He scanned them, taking an extra second to look at Pazley. She wasn't watching him, but that was fine.

He looked to Sebastian who gave him a nod and turned away.

He climbed his dragon, flicking his tongue and they rose to the air.

Sebastian was the general, directing forces. It was Natalia that had wrote the treaties, that had organized how the trade would work.

But it was Sebastian that would force the Changeling clans in Vaalbara to bend or die.

------

Vaalbara burned, and burned. Sebastian stood in the ashes of one of the clearings watching the world burn. He turned to Rhain, sliding his eyes back to horizon.

The Ridderak had finally found common ground with them. Money, profit, power - what else motivated anyone now? Safety perhaps but they'd all have that soon enough.

He spotted Viren's pack prowling through the underbrush, he could feel Sarai's Light Wraiths taking to the trees and continuing their burning. Her Blood Wraiths stuck to the ground, massacring any enemy forces that got too close to her mate and his wolf pack.

"How does it feel?"

Rhain looked up from the forest floor to Sebastian.

"Like a world is dying. That these are it's last death throws."

Sebastian gave a nod and turned away.

"Good."

------

Leesan stared in horror at his father, turning away.

"That wasn't sacrifice, that was cowardice!"

"Leesan -"

"You and Estelle's parents basically say the same thing. That their suffering somehow matters less than the luxury we have -"

"It's not about luxury."

Rhain tried to control his temper. He loved his boy, his curiosity. His scholarly mind had only been enhanced with Day's training. But Day's Princess wasn't him. Sarai and Viren had raised their children in a sheltered life. He respected them both, but this - this blind eye wasn't how he and Oraya raised their own.

Leesan glared right back, and Rhain fought to control his temper.

"It isn't about privilege, luxury - it was about survival. We had no money left Leesan after those centuries of war. We all were exhausted and just wanted it all to end. So we made the deals we did to -"

"At the expense of the people who lived there! At the expense of history and the rare flora and fauna that are now lost Papa! There has to be some change! There has to - we have money not right? Why can't we change that? You came from there right? Surely Vaalbara should be saved now that you can -"

"You ask for us to go back to a world where they will demand our heads," Rhain snapped. "You think we can just go back to how it was? You think that everything will go smoothly and there will be no consequences!"

He respected the drive his son had found, he admired the young male he was becoming, but he wasn't seeing the big picture. He wasn't seeing the consequences.

He stood stall, his fingers tightened at his side he ground his teeth trying to ease his temper once more. "Do you wish to see your mother and I in chains? Or see your siblings wasting away because we have no money to pay for food? Or how about your mate and children-!" No, he wasn't going to go to that level. That was his anger, that was his rage.

"We made the choice and the sacrifice for what was best, we did what we thought would save us all. We did not make this deal lightly, we did not do it not looking at the whole picture Leesan. Sometimes sacrifices are needed."

[sonneillonv]

and chrissie surely didn't tell him the real reason why she needed it. she probably told him she's stressed because of finals after springbreak so he didn't know the extent of her situation. he wouldn't have given it to her if he thought it could harm her. love your additions.

Thank you, Anon 💜

And no, she definitely didn't tell him the real reason or he wouldn't have been quite as shocked when Vecna's attack first started. 😅 She might have told him she's having really bad dreams, or maybe that she's been so anxious with a sense of impending doom that she can't focus on anything else. Maybe just that she 'feels scared all the time'. But my overall guess would be that he would have thought her problem was anxiety and/or depression, and Ketamine is actually very effective for treating depression!

A Ketamine high is characterized by disassociation and euphoria, which may be why Eddie thought it might help her - not only by lifting her mood, but also by giving her some distance from whatever was causing her such anxiety in her life so she could relax. A low dose, taken once, would have been really truly unlikely to cause her any harm or give her a bad experience, so the people saying that Eddie didn't give a shit about her safety are way off-base. As party drugs go, he picked a very safe one for her, and one that may actually have been able to help her had her problem NOT been, y'know, supernatural.

Mental health stigma being what it was in the 80's, I strongly doubt she would have gone into too much detail. But one of the things I love about Hellcheer, and that makes me love Eddie, is that after talking to him for literally five minutes Chrissy felt like she could trust him to help her without judging her. And I've said many times, and will continue to say, that I think Eddie being 'the local weed-and-occasional-pill-guy' and Eddie being a DM are actually two sides of the same moral precept for him, which is this: When your life is shit, escape is a kindness.

An escape can be a couple hours in a fantasy role-playing game where the goals are concrete and you can actually win. Or an escape can be a couple hours of a euphoric trip. An escape can be the stage high you get off playing heavy metal for an enthusiastic audience of five drunks. Eddie's whole character is built around the idea of 'escape' which is, incidentally, why his cowardice makes perfect sense - he runs from problems, he helps other people run from problems. The system has never helped him, so he works outside it. He sees someone like Chrissy, with the walls closing in around her, and he opens a window for her the only way he knows how. It's not greed or negligence, it's mercy.

Is it the absolute bestest, most ideal way for Chrissy to address her problems? Of course not. In a perfect world, her whole family would be in (free, competent, compassionate) therapy - and it's worth noting here that Chrissy DID try that. She was talking to a therapist, but I doubt the guidance counselor was licensed to prescribe and even if she was, that would have meant getting Chrissy's parents involved. Actually, it may even have been her recommendation that Chrissy see a doctor licensed to prescribe antidepressants that drove Chrissy to Eddie in the first place - if she knew she needed chemical help, but she couldn't tell her parents, that leaves her one obvious option.

What a lot of people in this fandom don't seem to realize is that we do not live in a perfect world. If you actually care about helping people and reducing the harm they suffer from their circumstances, you have to meet them where they are, and where they are is usually messy and imperfect and problematic and less-than-ideal. You have to square with the fact that people still deserve help when they make choices you don't like. If you judge them for using the only safe resources they had (or in Eddie's case, for offering the only safe resources people had), you're actually doing the opposite of good - you're contributing to a stigma that drives people away from seeking help through legal channels.

[stargleam-star]

My predictions for A Starless Clan

Some of you may know I recently read River! It was a really good book and it had a lot of mystery to it, things that we'll no doubt see throughout the rest of the arc. Here's some stuff I think/hope will happen (warning, spoilers under the cut)

I think one of the biggest mysteries in River is the voice speaking to Frostpaw. Are they manevolent? A Starclan warrior? I think it's probably Moth Flight! The cat Frostpaw vaguely got to see was described as having green eyes. That certainly couldn't be Willowshine. It would make sense if it was Moth Flight instead, since she was the first medicine cat. I can't exactly put my finger onto why she'd talk to Frostpaw, but my theory is:

If the mysterious voice is Moth Flight, she is contacting Frostpaw as a way to make Riverclan's connection to Starclan stronger. That or she's manipulating Frostpaw for some reason. Maybe so cats don't go trying to change the medicine cat's code? Or perhaps so they will? Guess we'll find out

Why did Curlfeather warn Frostpaw to trust no cat? I believe it's probably because too many cats in Riverclan want power rn, so everyone is trying to keep each other from being chosen as the next leader, whether by leaving fake signs or eliminating the competition (Im p sure someone in Riverclan sent those dogs after Curlfeather). In the end this might lead to a Stone Teller situation, when Riverclan's medicine cat is also leader. This would mean Frostpaw would eventually rule Riverclan. I definitely don't think it will be Mothwing, because I don't see her living until the end of the arc, sadly.

Lightleap is going to turn evil. Like 100% it's not even a question. She's trying to make up for her cowardice, for not going into the Dark Forest. By ensuring that some day she will, so she can overcome her fear. And to do this, she's been risking cats' lives; Sunbeam's Blazefire's, her own, and Reedwhisker. Yes I think she killed Reedwhisker. Idk if it was on purpose or not though. It probably wasn't at first. She was probably trying to defend Shadowclan territory and then took it too far. But now I think she's going to join the traditionalists group and fall further into darkness and ambition. She might get convinced to kill Fringewhisker. Well she is a Tigerstar clone, she had to go thru something like this sooner or later. I for obe welcome our first evil female Tigerstar clone with open arms

Berryheart is definitely not evil. She's most likely going to take things too far, and probably try to deposed Tigerheartstar, but that's about it. She might also try to prove half clan relationships are a bad idea by making her son's relationship with Fringewhisker fail somehow. I don't see her going down an evil path tho, not without influence. Lightleap would certainly be the right influence for that though, hmmm...

Next to talk about: Nightheart and Sunbeam. They're definitely going to have a romance. I'm sorry, it's stupid but I can already see it happening. One way or another Nightheart's gonna get himself into a half clan relationship. And Sunbeam seems like a hopeless romantic. I won't be too mad if this occurs. But if it does I hope by the end it all falls apart and both of them realize they're not meant to be/should just be friends. If Nightheart doesn't end up with Sunbeam though I bet the Erins will try to shove him into the arms of a cat like Needleclaw or even Whistlepaw

Sunbeam might become deputy someday. Cloverfoot will probably end up getting killed off, and Sunbeam might be chosen to mentor one of Dovewing's new litter, which would make her eligible for the position. Plus she's very loyal, and a rule follower, so she'll probably be seen as a good choice for the role

Bramblestar. Where to begin with him? Something is obviously up with him again. Hes definitely not possesed tho. I think he's probably got ptsd. It'll most likely continue to get in the way of his ability to lead throughout the arc. Especially because most of Thunderclan is still afraid of him. My prediction for Bramblestar is that he might be the first leader to be deposed. Alternatively, I think he's going to step down from the position willingly. In fact that's what I think is most likely to happen. The Erins love this guy, there's no way they're going to let him be forcefully demoted. So, I think they'll have him want to step down. He'll most likely go back to being a loyal warrior, trying to prove to his clanmates that he's ok and that he's not bad. Or maybe he'll retire, although I highly doubt that

If Bramblestar isn't the first leader to get deposed with the new code set in place, then its 100% going to be Tigerheartstar. Or at least Shadowclan's traditionalists will try to have him deposed. In the end he'll probably end up keeping power, because the Erins seem to like him too much (they literally resurrected him just to make sure he could become leader ffs) and also I doubt they'll wanna make Cloverfoot/any Shadowclan she-cat leader (because the Erins are sexist, and there's never been a female Shadowclan leader in any main series book)

[tothedarkdarkseas]

Adding to what the other anon said, yes, it would be a friend of Stu's who would tell him the truth. Stu would try to live in denial of the fact for a while, but he eventually has to be honest with himself. Unfortunately, (or fortunately) he keeps the charade up with Murdoc. He inevitably feels tempted to talk to Murdoc about upholding the charade, but it just never happens. This shared cowardice inevitably bites them later on. The harder reality is to accept, the more entangled they become.

I see, so Stuart keeps the truth of the matter to himself because he doesn't want to give up the excuses, the framework readily supporting their dynamic-- if he did, he'd have to admit that he wants things to remain as they are purely from his own self-motivated desire. There are moments when the discomfort of honesty is too much and he flinches and seems to shrink where before he'd stand tall. It's like reverting to his gawkiest, least stable self, before he'd been given the idea of a holy role, so to speak. I can definitely get on board with Stu's cowardice, selfishness and inability to own up to what life choices he's actually had dominion over leading him to lie, and I am always compelled by the point in a narrative where things finally hit the wall. However, I do have to wonder how Murdoc would really react. Would he honestly feel betrayed, does he really believe he has a right to feel that? Would he be more superficially angry, angry at being lied to, angry at Stuart ever knowing something he didn't, angry more at the idea of being made a fool of than the actual feelings their lifestyle gave him? Or would he simply feel... a bit hollow, a bit unsure how confidently he can continue the way he'd most like to when he and Stuart both have to look the other in the eye, knowing there's no excuse to fall back on. At first, I pictured something a bit different from what you’ve described, I think: I can envision the hours or days after Stu's had this chat with Murdoc, the two of them hanging back from the other without really separating, just awkwardly hovering on the far edge of their space. It's Murdoc who falls in step with Stu again, feet always two steps behind his heels, sitting up beside his head and neck like knife fodder when he rests. Stu tells him to quit it, it's not real, and after studying him for a time, Murdoc says "Can't we act like it is?" He doesn't sound hungry or devout like he used to, he just sounds small. He sounds like he's all the worse for knowing.